Libertarian debate from NY post article

A piece written earlier this month by Christopher Beam is causing some reaction on the internet. One example is this American Conservative article.

It's been interesting to follow. Beam states things like this:

For all the talk about casting off government shackles, libertarianism is still considered the crazy uncle of American politics: loud and cocky and occasionally profound but always a bit unhinged. And Rand Paul’s dad is the craziest uncle of all. Ron Paul wants to “end the Fed,” as the title of his book proclaims, and return the country to the gold standard—stances that have made him a tea-party icon. Now, as incoming chairman of the subcommittee that oversees the Fed, he’ll have an even bigger platform. Paul Sr. says there’s not much daylight between him and his son. “I can’t think of anything we grossly disagree on,” he says.

James Banks this:

Movements like these aren’t “crazy,” “impossible” or “utopian.” They seek to implement policies which are not so far beyond the pale of what an average American would be willing to live with. But the lengths to which libertarian activists go seem out of proportion from the perspective of the general public; why move to New Hampshire or a seastead in the ocean when the average citizen’s most intimate, obnoxious interaction with government occurs only once a year (in mid-April) and he is still free to express his opinion at the ballot box? For this reason, some politicians and voters will always channel their inner-libertarian (when organizations like TSA exist to hate)–but being fully possessed by that inner-libertarian is as rare as channeling him is common.